How is this even possible? Is the 777 that bad? If so why do airlines keep buying it?

"We have about same number of seats, and I can fly about same range, within a couple hundred miles, but burn 30 percent less fuel and I'm doing it with a much quieter airplane," Leahy said of the A350-900 versus the 777-200.

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
How is this even possible? Is the 777 that bad? If so why do airlines keep buying it?

Why not? The A350 always got to have a new composite wing and a new lightweight Li-Al fuselage. Now it seems that it will have a composite half (rear) fuselage and a Li-Al half (forward) fuselage or viceversa, so very roughly speaking it will have at least 75% of the weight reduction factor of the 787. It will sport the same engine in a bleed air version, and engine manufacturers have played down the importance of bleedless vs bleed air for fuel savings effects.
So it will have efficency improvements on the same order of magnitude of 787, albeit a bit less, and since the 787 is (I think) supposed to have a 30-33% savings over the existing conventional competitors I will say that we are almost there.

Now pick with a grain of salt what Lehay say about having 'roughly the same seats and range' and it is pretty plausible that the A359 will have maybe a 30% savings over the 772ER on a trip basis and say 25% or so on a seat basis.

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):How is this even possible? Is the 777 that bad? If so why do airlines keep buying it?

"We have about same number of seats, and I can fly about same range, within a couple hundred miles, but burn 30 percent less fuel and I'm doing it with a much quieter airplane," Leahy said of the A350-900 versus the 777-200.

Well it's not so surprising really. The A350 is supposed to match the B787, so just like the B787 has those advantages over the B777, so does the A350. It's a simple equation really...

Quoting FlyAUA (Reply 3):so just like the B787 has those advantages over the B777,

AFAIK all comparisons released by Boeing for the 787 are relative to the 767, not the 777, though with a lower weight yet similar capacity and range and more efficient engines the A350 will be more economical than the 772 though 30% may be stretching it.

Airbus may have a direct competitor to the B787-800/900 and B777, although the B787-300 remains not targeted. Airbus may find that this market segment may prove to be very attractive as it is intended to replace A300/310 and the B757/767 on short hopes. I can not see Airbus laying back and giving it all away to Boeing.

By the way what ever happened to the A305 project? Does anyone have any info as to what was proposed?

Quoting WINGS (Reply 6):Airbus may have a direct competitor to the B787-800/900 and B777,

Not for the 787-800! the 350 is way bigger... So Airbus has a direct competitor to just the 789 and possibly the 772.

But I am not sure if the 359 is adequate to compete with the 772. 772 holds more cargo and is wider... more range and much more spacious interior... I can see Boeing modify the 772, just like its going to do to the 747Adv. - new engines and a modified wing tips.

Airbus is smart going after the 772... but I think they are ignoring the smaller widebody jets. BIG MISTAKE!!!!

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 7):But I am not sure if the 359 is adequate to compete with the 772. 772 holds more cargo and is wider... More range and much more spacious interior... I can see Boeing modify the 772, just like its going to do to the 747Adv. - new engines and a modified wing tips.

You may be right as to the range and cargo but as for comfort I would choose the A330/340 over the B777 any day. I still prefer 2-4-2 seating over the 3-5-3.

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):How is this even possible? Is the 777 that bad? If so why do airlines keep buying it?

A-It's not "so bad". It is one of the most efficient passenger jets ever developed.

B- It is being somewhat eclipsed by newer technology and that happens to all aircraft. Just because the 787 is now the more efficient replacement for the A-330 does that mean the A-330 is "that bad"?? Or because the 747-100/200 was replaced by the 777 does not mean the 747 was "that bad" ?? Hardly-the new product is simply superior.

C- Boeing will incorporate the new 787 technology across the family of commerical aircraft and develop a 777 replacement that will offer greatly enhanced performance.

D- The 777 was, until the 787, the most advanced product offering in the Boeing line. It has sold about 900 airframes to date. It hardy qaulifies as a "bad" aircraft. It outsold it's nearest competitor to almost the point of shutdown, hence the A-350 had to be developed.

E-The A-350 is a reaction to the leap Boeing took with the 787. It is supposed to compete with both the 787 and 777-200. The 777-200 is on life support anyway and will be replaced.

The 772ER is past it's experiation date, Boeing knows this. It's order stream has slowed down significantly since before the 787 and A350 have been available for purchase. The last new customer was Air NZ (a year ago) and the 772ER hasn't been a part of most major evaluations since. It's just a matter of when to replace it... how many times has what EK wanted been what the rest of the market wanted?

Quoting WINGS (Reply 6):By the way what ever happened to the A305 project? Does anyone have any info as to what was proposed?

Purely conceptual. It will be atleast 2015 before it has a chance of becoming reality.

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 7):But I am not sure if the 359 is adequate to compete with the 772. 772 holds more cargo and is wider... more range and much more spacious interior... I can see Boeing modify the 772, just like its going to do to the 747Adv. - new engines and a modified wing tips.

All valid points, but the cost and lead-time for a 777NG might be prohibitive. By Airbus own admission, they predict several "waves" of 300-seat replacement and growth. I can't see why Boeing will invest heavily in the 777 now just to catch the first wave.

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):How is this even possible? Is the 777 that bad? If so why do airlines keep buying it?

The A359 is still just a blueprint. Considering the steady improvement in composits and manufacturing, it only stands to reason that new designs will be more efficient than existing ones. Considering that both manufactures deal in hyperbole, it remains to be seen how efficient the A359 will actually be. Keep in mind that Boeing has enjoyed a recent track record of exceeding expectations while Airbus has had a problem meeting expectations. This too could change.

Boeing is at this point selling only 773ER and 772LR models, though some 772ERs are still being sold/delivered. The 772LR is more efficient than the 772ER, and it is pretty interesting that Leahy seems to be ignoring that plane, or is he?

The 772 legacy will be receiving winglet retrofits before the A350 EIS, which should increase efficiency 5-8% for those who want to keep theirs, cutting down on the A350 advantage as a replacement for a still viable airframe. But it will still be 15 years newer than the 772ER.

I still don't get why Airbus is forcing 30 more seats on the market.

Either way, something the A350 has going for it is this: many 787 launch customers are buying 772LRs also. With the A350-8/9, you get a 789 and a 772 sized craft in the same type, with same engines and 90%+ commonality.

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 7):But I am not sure if the 359 is adequate to compete with the 772. 772 holds more cargo and is wider... more range and much more spacious interior... I can see Boeing modify the 772, just like its going to do to the 747Adv. - new engines and a modified wing tips.

I don't think a cannibalized 772 can make up for an all new (or so claimed by Airbus) design like the A350. Same issue as before with the 787/A350, except Airbus did not make that mistake and the A350 became an all new deisgn.

Considering the greater payload and range of the 777, they could get closer then the initial A350 concept, but doubt enough for the all new design.

Keep in mind that the 777 already makes use of composites (little, but still), making reaching that 30% superior efficiency claimed by Airbus with a 777Adv. much more difficult.

This is what will be needed to compete on the same playing field:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 10):C- Boeing will incorporate the new 787 technology across the family of commerical aircraft and develop a 777 replacement that will offer greatly enhanced performance.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 19):This is what will be needed to compete on the same playing field:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 10):
C- Boeing will incorporate the new 787 technology across the family of commerical aircraft and develop a 777 replacement that will offer greatly enhanced performance.

Agreed. Whatever Boeing could do to reduce the OEW of the 772ER while either maintaining or increasing the MTOW would suffice to counter the A359. And Boeing has time to do this. Even if a formal launch for such a project is issued in 2008-9, it should be ready to enter airline service right around 2012. By this time, the 787 would be in airline service, Boeing would have a much better understanding of the issues involved with composite technology and still emerge with a product only a year or two after the A359. Just my

Tell me what engines are to power the 359 at the weight necessary to get 300 pax , 7500nm?

787 engines won't do it.

I have not seen the article but would be interested in the MTOW Airbus is stating for the 359 with this capability.

Airbus have obviously made some btreakthrough efficiency discovery, to get 30% efficiency gain , considering the 787 can only get 20% improvement with a start from scratch all weight bearing composite aircraft, new engines and groundbreaking systems improvements, which Airbus have already said they are not going to use.

One thing is for sure, if this is not a distortion of the figures, as well as killing the 772 it will kill the 380, and the 340, and the 330.

No.
Exactly in which way this hypotetical 777ADV will achieve efficiency gains similar to the all composite 787 and 75% composite A350 without going down the composite alley, ie without being an almost all new plane with a proportionate development cost?

Too short space for my favorite hopelessly long winded one liner

25 DfwRevolution
: It's cool... there are a few carriers that opperate 3-4-3, namely EK. But would the cost and lead-time of such an aircraft be? I agree that the A359